Skip to main content
Log in

Some influences on public participation in a genetic screening program

  • Origind Articles
  • Published:
Journal of Community Health Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

To identify the psychosocial factors associated with voluntary cooperation in mass genetic testing, stratified random samples of 500 participants and 500 nonparticipants were drawn from an identified at-risk population for Tay-Sachs disease. Participants were relatively younger and better educated, reported higher levels of perceived susceptibility to being a carrier, and also stated more often that the impact of learning of being a carrier would be low. Participants were also more likely to indicate they would not alter plans for future progeny. Recommendations are made for enhancing participation in future genetic screening programs of this type.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Etzioni A:Genetic Fix. New York, Macmillan, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Rosner F: Screening for genetic desease.New Engl J Med 289221, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Kaback MM: Heterozygote screening-A social challenge.New Engl J Med 2891090–1091, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Lappe M, Gustafson JM, Roblin R: Ethical and social issues in screening for genetic disease.New Engl J Med 2861129–1132,1972.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bowman JF: Ethical issues in genetic screening.New Engl J Med 287204–205, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Whitten CF: Sickle cell programming-An imperiled promise.New Engl J Med 288318–319, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Rutkow IM, Lipton JM: Some negative aspects of state health departments' policies related to screening for sickle cell anemia.Amer J Pub Health 64217–221, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Beutler E, Boggs DR, Heller P, et al: Hazards of indiscriminate screening for sickling.New Engl J Med 2851485–1486, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Rosenstock IM: Why people use health services.Milbank Mem Fund Q 44 (No. 3, Pt2):94–127, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Kasl SA, Cobb S: Health behavior, illness behavior, and sick role behavior. I. Health and illness behavior.Arch Environ Health 12246–266, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  11. McKinlay JB: Some approaches and problems in the study of the use of services-An overview.J Health Soc Behav 13115–152, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kegeles SS: Attitudes and behavior of the public regarding cervical cytology: Current findings and new directions for research.J Chron Dis 20 911–922, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  13. United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service, Bureau of State Services:Public Participation in Medical Screening Programs: A Socio-Psychological Study. PHS Publication No. 572. Washington, DC; United States Government Printing Office, 1958.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Borsky PN, Sagen OK: Motivations toward health examinations.Amer J Pub Health 49514–527, 1959.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kegeles SS: Some motives for seeking preventive dental care.J Amer Dent Assoc 6790–98, 1963.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Rosenstock IM, Derryberry M, Carriger BK: Why people fail to seek poliomyelitis vaccination.Pub Health Rep 7498–103, 1959.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Becker MH, Drachman RH, Kirscht JP: A new approach to explaining sick-role behavior in low-income populations.Amer J Pub Health 64205–216, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Leonard CO, Chase GA, Childs B: Genetic counseling: A consumers' view.New Engl J Med 287433–439, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Herman MW: The poor: Their medical needs and the health services available to them.Ann Am Acad Pol Soc Sci 39912–21, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Kaback MM, Zeiger RS, Reynolds LW, et al: Approaches to the prevention and control of Tay-Sachs disease. In AG Steinberg & AG Bearn (Eds),Progress in Medical Genetics, Vol 10. New York, Academic Press, in press.

  21. Kaback MM, Becker MH, Ruth MV: Sociologic studies in human genetics. I. Compliance factors in a voluntary heterozygote screening program. In D Bergsma (Ed),Ethical, Social, and Legal Dimensions of Screening for Human Genetic Disease, Vol 10. New York, National Foundation, 1974.

  22. Birch HG: The role of motivational factors in insightful problem-solving.J Comp Psychol 38295–317, 1945.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Blackwell B: The literature of delay in seeking medical care for chronic illnesses.Health Ed Monogr 163–31, 1963.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Grizzle JE, Starmer CF, Koch GG: Analysis of categorical data by linear models.Biomet 25148–158, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Additional information

Dr. Becker is Associate Professor, Departments of Pediatrics (School of Medicine) and Behavioral Sciences (School of Hygiene and Public Health), The Johns Hopkins University, Edwards A. Park Building, Room B172, The Johns Hopkins Hospital, 601 North Broadway, Baltimore, Maryland 21205. Dr. Kaback is Associate Professor, Departments of Pediatrics and Medicine, and Associate Chief, Division of Medical Genetics, School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles. Dr. Rosenstock is Professor and Chairman, Department of Health Behavior, School of Public Health, University of Michigan. Ms. Ruth is Chairman, Department of Community Health Nursing, School of Nursing, University of Maryland.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Becker, M.H., Kaback, M.M., Rosenstock, I.M. et al. Some influences on public participation in a genetic screening program. J Community Health 1, 3–14 (1975). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01318939

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01318939

Keywords

Navigation